Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-04-2017, 11:20 AM
Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
So I decided to post this in the philosophy section considering feminism and social constructionists views of gender can come from a feminist philosophy. Right now I'm not really discussing the political foundations of these views, but instead I wanted to isolate the discussion about personal identity. I've recently watched quite a bit of videos from Jordan Peterson and he seems to argue that there is data to support a correlation between sex and gender identity that goes beyond merely a social construction. I was interested in this because, being from a progressive school, I hear quite a bit about gender being a social construction. I'm wondering what are people's views on this issue. Peterson claimed that sociological studies in the Scandinavian countries showed that the lack of social structures that imposed certain views or ideals of gender resulted in the sexes becoming even more polarized in behavior and personal identity. Is this true? Is gender a social construction that encompasses a full spectrum of personal identities or is there a biological component to gender identity? I'd also appreciate any links to data on this topic.

"I think part of the appeal of mathematical logic is that the formulas look mysterious - you write backward Es!" - Hilary Putnam
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2017, 04:03 PM
RE: Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
The short answer is yes, there is a biological component to gender identity. How important is it? It's hard to tell. How and what does it create specifically? It's hard to tell. Women and men definetly have physiological which can, with the support of a certain environment, create psychological differences.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like epronovost's post
13-04-2017, 05:19 PM
RE: Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
Categorization is a social construct.
Gender is a categorization, which is influenced by biology, societal expectations, and personal preferences.

If we came from dust, then why is there still dust?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like cactus's post
15-04-2017, 06:52 PM
RE: Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
My guess is that striving for neutrality in attitudes towards gender and sexuality is itself a bias. Biology doesn't seem particularly neutral. Most (fe)males identify as (fe)male, and a nearly as overwhelming majority of people are attracted to the opposite rather than the same sex. That doesn't make the outliers wrong anymore than it makes left-handed people or albinos or bald people wrong. But I don't think anyone in their right mind ASKS to be different. It's hard enough having some idea what to expect and pretty much automatic social support for your default-riddled self. After 60 years I am still figuring me out, and I shudder to think how much harder that would be if I were not straight as an arrow and people disliked me for for being that way. That is why I never did understand why anyone has the notion that (for example) homosexuality is some sort of casual choice. It simply can't be ... no one in their right mind would choose up front to just make life more complicated and uncertain than it already inherently is.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes mordant's post
15-04-2017, 07:35 PM
RE: Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
(13-04-2017 04:03 PM)epronovost Wrote:  The short answer is yes, there is a biological component to gender identity. How important is it? It's hard to tell. How and what does it create specifically? It's hard to tell. Women and men definetly have physiological which can, with the support of a certain environment, create psychological differences.

Agreed, and as for how that plays out in college.... Well.... for me its the same with almost every issue. Pretty much everyone is fucking wrong because they take hard ideological positions that don't really account for the nuance and complexity of the topic and on both sides use emotion based arguments rather than rational arguments. Which is why I generally try to avoid politics, I'd be hated by both sides because I refuse to side with either Ideology and call them both out on their bullshit. I usually lean more to one side than the other, but that's irrelevant with such topics.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2017, 03:02 PM (This post was last modified: 03-06-2017 03:07 PM by SomethingWitty2.)
RE: Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
Also raises the question, if we are heavily influenced by our Biology, should we listen or be restrained by it socially, sexually? How much of our orientation is cultural?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2017, 03:57 PM
RE: Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
99.7%+ of people identify their gender identity with the genitals they are born with. Of course there is a correlation. It is the norm. Anyone not identifying with the genitals they are born with are therefore definitionally outside of the norm. It's a basic biological reality. To question that it to question reality. We are our biology. Of course it should go without saying, but yet I feel compelled to say, of course all of us should empathize with and treat others outside of the norm with the same respect their counterparts would receive, etc.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2017, 04:51 PM
RE: Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
(15-04-2017 06:52 PM)mordant Wrote:  My guess is that striving for neutrality in attitudes towards gender and sexuality is itself a bias. Biology doesn't seem particularly neutral. Most (fe)males identify as (fe)male, and a nearly as overwhelming majority of people are attracted to the opposite rather than the same sex. That doesn't make the outliers wrong anymore than it makes left-handed people or albinos or bald people wrong. But I don't think anyone in their right mind ASKS to be different. It's hard enough having some idea what to expect and pretty much automatic social support for your default-riddled self. After 60 years I am still figuring me out, and I shudder to think how much harder that would be if I were not straight as an arrow and people disliked me for for being that way. That is why I never did understand why anyone has the notion that (for example) homosexuality is some sort of casual choice. It simply can't be ... no one in their right mind would choose up front to just make life more complicated and uncertain than it already inherently is.

1) your attitude toward being considered an outsider isn't universal

2) just from personal anecdotal observation i think young people think of sexual orientation and gender as much more fluid than previous generations

3) people may be inclined to identify with something because it's in vogue or has a novelty- who knows what's in people's head

4) I've always felt somewhat androgynous and bisexual myself but I've lived almost entirely in the realm of heterosexual male privilege. It seems to me that it's best not to try to restrict people or expect them to adhere to a biological definition as their gender. I'm inclined to let people define themselves as they see fit. What's it to me?

Mordant, hardly any of that was directed at you. You're probably thinking WTF??? I just quoted you and started numbering my thoughts pretty much at random lol

Except number 1
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2017, 04:54 PM
RE: Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
(13-04-2017 11:20 AM)Naielis Wrote:  So I decided to post this in the philosophy section considering feminism and social constructionists views of gender can come from a feminist philosophy. Right now I'm not really discussing the political foundations of these views, but instead I wanted to isolate the discussion about personal identity. I've recently watched quite a bit of videos from Jordan Peterson and he seems to argue that there is data to support a correlation between sex and gender identity that goes beyond merely a social construction. I was interested in this because, being from a progressive school, I hear quite a bit about gender being a social construction. I'm wondering what are people's views on this issue. Peterson claimed that sociological studies in the Scandinavian countries showed that the lack of social structures that imposed certain views or ideals of gender resulted in the sexes becoming even more polarized in behavior and personal identity. Is this true? Is gender a social construction that encompasses a full spectrum of personal identities or is there a biological component to gender identity? I'd also appreciate any links to data on this topic.

we can't even construct a society where work hard, earn your keep, and help when you can are the primary goals. And your worried about a dude that is pissed off he has a penis?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2017, 05:10 PM
RE: Social Constructionism and Gender as a Spectrum
Why not? Isn't concern for our fellows the cornerstone of building a better society?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes I'mFred's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: